Why do you fly FC3?

[okopanja]

29 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

The difference is that the FF actually has an electric system modeled, a fuel system, an hydraulic system, an engine starter, etc, etc ... all of which can be damaged on battle, unlike the FC3 aircrafts

Not entirely true. I think you are giving too much credit to FF. The major difference is availability of distinct devices and their relations. However this is often not modeled consistantly or even introduces non-existing devices that do not exist on real aircraft. Furthermore sensor devices appear to be often modeled outside of operating principles of real devices, perhaps the best example are radars, which are essentially checking the line of sight between objects and are calculating radar equation. In other words radar is emulated. Simulation of radar would include implementing each radar component along its inputs, operation and output. E.g. this would allow for realistic implementation of ECM effects.

FLIR/night vision are if I am correct in most cases renders of camera views to which the varioty of filters are applied.

Edited August 29, 2023 by okopanja

[Rudel_chw]

3 hours ago, okopanja said:

Not entirely true. I think you are giving too much credit to FF.

I see … should I ditch my FF modules and return to FC3 ?  Somehow I don’t really enjoy the simpler planes, miss the study part too much.

[GGTharos]

8 minutes ago, Rudel_chw said:

I see … should I ditch my FF modules and return to FC3 ?  Somehow I don’t really enjoy the simpler planes, miss the study part too much.

If that's how you want to phrase it, I like to study the flying part, so I don't miss FF too much.  Still want it, but not necessary as long as there's enough systems and a great FM.

[okopanja]

5 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

I see … should I ditch my FF modules and return to FC3 ?  Somehow I don’t really enjoy the simpler planes, miss the study part too much.

Nope, I did not say that. In case of some FC3 airplanes, everything you listed (e.g. navigation, INS, ...) is indeed missing. I hope with time we will actually get a simulation in the areas I mentioned, as well as transition of FC3 to FF. And yes this also include "banned" modules such as Fulcrum/Flanker/Eegle. Giving them FF makeover would not disclose more information than it is currently, since in eitherway these aircraft (talking about early 80s, not subsequent upgrades and derivations) are much simpler compared to e.g. modern multirole fighters.

[Pavlin_33]

12 hours ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

The difference is that the FF actually has an electric system modeled, a fuel system, an hydraulic system, an engine starter, etc, etc ... all of which can be damaged on battle, unlike the FC3 aircrafts.

So does the FC3 and just like the FF ones, those can get damaged also. Difference in FC3 is that you dont have full control but rather system control.

[Soulres]

the "15 years of DCS!" showed the real problem, and its why people like FC3.  15 years and 0 finished aircraft.

 

 

[Rudel_chw]

35 minutes ago, Soulres said:

the "15 years of DCS!" showed the real problem, and its why people like FC3.  15 years and 0 finished aircraft.

 

Funny ... yet people complains a lot when an aircraft does not get updates or new features or updated textures ... seems like no one really wants a totally finished aircraft, or else they complain that the aircraft is "forgotten" or "abandoned"  ... sometimes most threads I see here are complains, wonder why no one can be happy with what we've got so far.

[VZ_342]

1 hour ago, Rudel_chw said:

 

Funny ... yet people complains a lot when an aircraft does not get updates or new features or updated textures ... seems like no one really wants a totally finished aircraft, or else they complain that the aircraft is "forgotten" or "abandoned"  ... sometimes most threads I see here are complains, wonder why no one can be happy with what we've got so far.

Because, to quote James Bond....

 

 

THE WORLD IS NOT ENOUGH!

 

Seriously though, some aircraft have legitimate issues that need fixes (F-5 automatic wing removal, for instance) but are ignored for years. 

[Xeemix]

Nice simple flying machines, I don't got much left in the noggin to learn too many more FF modules. FC3 is easy to fly and the big variety of planes is really great.

[jethead]

MiG-29, Su-25, Su-27, Su-33 and A10A

Edited September 7, 2023 by jethead

[draconus]

On 9/2/2023 at 2:59 PM, Soulres said:

15 years and 0 finished aircraft.

Here's a list of modules with a status: released.

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/shop/modules/filter/status-is-release/apply/

This doesn't mean they are not supported or no additional features/updates will be added though.

[buceador]

I ONLY fly FC3 aircraft in re-enactment scenarios that require aircraft from eastern european countries (potentially) in conflict
(I cannot specifically name conflicts without being castigated )

[wasserfall]

I started with the Flanker in 1995 and will probably die flying the FC3 Flanker and will be rising like a Phoenix when ever the Full DCS module of the Flanker appears!

[Smith]

I still fly Flaming Cliffs becuase the Su-33 is the only Carrier Aircraft, that has good landing dynamics. The F/A-18 still doesn't bounce on touch down and the F-14 only has good landing dynamics when i tweak some files

[303_Kermit]

22 minutes ago, Smith said:

I still fly Flaming Cliffs becuase the Su-33 is the only Carrier Aircraft, that has good landing dynamics. The F/A-18 still doesn't bounce on touch down and the F-14 only has good landing dynamics when i tweak some files

I love it. You made my day. Pinned down on Squad wall, until I find something more ridiculous.

Edited September 17, 2023 by 303_Kermit

[Top Jockey]

On 9/17/2023 at 7:56 AM, Smith said:

I still fly Flaming Cliffs becuase the Su-33 is the only Carrier Aircraft, that has good landing dynamics. The F/A-18 still doesn't bounce on touch down and the F-14 only has good landing dynamics when i tweak some files

 

What do you mean, exactly which landing characteristics in the F-14 aren't good for you ?

Regarding landing the F-14 at the boat, I can only recal the bubble effect behind the Carrier, but other than that ...

[Smith]

5 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

 

What do you mean, exactly which landing characteristics in the F-14 aren't good for you ?

Regarding landing the F-14 at the boat, I can only recal the bubble effect behind the Carrier, but other than that ...

 

Here i made a report that the suspension is not correct modelled.

 

I even made a video that shows what i mean:

 

 

On 9/17/2023 at 9:19 AM, 303_Kermit said:

I love it. You made my day. Pinned down on Squad wall, until I find something more ridiculous.

 

Why ridiculous? Read my Bug report and then tell me again if this is ridiculous. The Su-33 always had it right. The F/A-18 and F-14 suspension is just not correct.

[falcon_120]

For me the main reason is the lack of a FF F15C and SU27. If i had those i would not touch FC3 i think, maybe some weird day when i want to fly a SU25 or Mig29 but that about it.

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[draconus]

On 9/30/2023 at 6:41 PM, Smith said:

F-14 suspension is just not correct.

They made suspension overhaul this year May-June.

[Smith]

37 minutes ago, draconus said:

They made suspension overhaul this year May-June.

I know, but it is still not correct. I will make another video when i have more free time.

[Keith Briscoe]

I imagine I'm one of the newer members/users here. I'm doing FC3 because I felt a bit intimidated to start with dcs. Plus, FC3 would give me Many options for a shockingly low price. I'm very satisfied,  with my 3 weeks of use and I've basically done 99% of my time in F15c.  Going to try the A10a(?) So I can see if I like pounding ground.

But, I'm also going to trial the F16 very soon to see if FF is all that some say.

[diego999]

4 hours ago, Keith Briscoe said:

I imagine I'm one of the newer members/users here. I'm doing FC3 because I felt a bit intimidated to start with dcs. Plus, FC3 would give me Many options for a shockingly low price. I'm very satisfied,  with my 3 weeks of use and I've basically done 99% of my time in F15c.  Going to try the A10a(?) So I can see if I like pounding ground.

But, I'm also going to trial the F16 very soon to see if FF is all that some say.

Don't forget there are fantastic mods, totally free.

A-4 Skyhawk and OV-10 Bronco to name a few.

 

[draconus]

11 hours ago, Keith Briscoe said:

I'm very satisfied,  with my 3 weeks of use and I've basically done 99% of my time in F15c.

I started with F-15C too. In fact I came to DCS for it. Price on sale was $5! A steal! Only after 1 and half year I wanted more and went FF.

[PawlaczGMD]

No FF Russian (modern-ish) aircraft. Boring to always fly Blue. Also I like the Su-25.

But I would probably buy all the ones I want if there was a FF option... 

[Phantom309]

I got FC3 mainly for the F15C, sure FF would be awesome. But I fly the F15 dressed with AK tail code because I actually worked on that tail number when I was active duty. 

Another reason was to learn how to fly. I suck at it and I'm all over the sky. Don't quite understand how to throttle trim and level flight yet. I think my virtual pilot actually got motion sickness last time I flew. Hopefully I can sort this out and start creating my own missions and campaigns.